Barcepundit reports on this story from the left wing UK Guardian, which details how in the early days of the Iraq war Al Qaeda was able to get its hands on a huge store of Saddam's weapons:

According to the piece, the material included chemical weapons precursors, as well as explosive used to detonate nuclear weapons (yes, they had been in store for years, but if they're deadly for al-Qaeda to have, wouldn't they be for Saddam too?)

So the Guardian doesn't note the irony that they're blaming Bush and the U.S. for the negligence of allowing al-Qaeda to steal... what wasn't supposed to be there in the first place. Haven't we been listening all these years that this was "based on filthy lies"?